tv Hearing on Unaccompanied Immigrant Children Sponsor Background Checks CSPAN December 3, 2015 4:02am-6:47am EST
>> thought. >> i will introduce schumer i usually wait for the ranking member but i was told to go ahead. several years ago, but when i have a short statement to put into the record because i want senator sessions to have time to speak. several years ago the obama administration improv minced -- promised by the offenders are people convicted of crimes and although there is more funding in 2015 as they are in our communities
large thousands of victims in many agencies and officers you cannot do the job they signed up to do. do we still think there is no crisis? the reserve the remainder of my time for senator sessions or somebody comes for the minority you listen to them. >> thank you mr. grassley for your leadership and your commitment to oversight to ensure that we work for the american people and we respond to the congressional representatives. although the administration is removing few were aliens the focus of today is the
interior that is an alarming development and contrary to the claims of the administration. members have made public statements of limited enforcement resources. it has normal enforcement's although falling significantly to remove criminal aliens is strengthened we're focusing on limited resources with people convicted of crimes not just those looking at income. and the president said on november 20th to keep the enforcement resources and actual threats and on the
criminals not families or children but to have executive amnesty for lawful permanent residence but since we cannot possibly remove everyone congress rejects my proposals and to allow for an example to give work permits and social security numbers to focus solely on removing criminals as we will establish today the number of removals' of criminal aliens from the interior has decrease significantly the reason is and because there are fewer criminal aliens them there
were just a few years ago but hundreds of thousands of known carol aliens in the united states new crimes are committed every day but we're seeing a decrease of criminal aliens. so with that finding that is available it has increased steadily with substantially less or more. and it is subject to removal. they don't have to commit a crime. but then those that commit crime are a higher priority for removal.
for a dangerous criminals remain in united states. as the government fails to keep violent criminals out of the country for pro and protecting lives is not the basic ideals of the government. and then to properly remove all such criminal aliens from the interior of the united states if identified. and this is what they are doing the senate judiciary committee to criminal alien violence. the whole nation watched and more importantly their
stories represent a sample of tragic events that happen every single day. this cannot continue american people have pleaded with congress to create a uniform and fair and lawful sense of immigration to protect their security but the of politicians that have failed to do so even with the august meeting of criminal aliens as the experienced prosecutor we're glad to have you here. you have to work hard to dig
up something. >> do you affirm the testimony will give is the truth though whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god? thank you. i will give us a short introduction if you want a full biography go to the committee website that has as its of director saldana of u.s. immigration and customs enforcement and confirmed by the senate december last year previously she served as u.s. attorney for the northern district of texas and served for very well there and also as the assistant u.s. attorney for the northern district of texas. i am ready for your opening
statement. >> all the senior leadership the field office directors will sell are in charge of the investigations and you were asked to provide a video in support of the overall mission of our efforts. they got a great kick out of it. ranking member and distinguished members of the committee i appreciate the opportunity to testify.
s senator sessions has mentioned it is the administration is subjective but this was very similar to my focus from the united states attorney before that. over which cases we could prosecute were which areas we prosecute them as. with over 3,000 federal laws. we could not take each and every case. and we also on the mission at i.c.e.. over the admonitions i wanted to leave this extraordinary group of women and men who have a
significant law-enforcement mission which is what i want to continue doing and i have shared with year-old to a set of issues that our chaco of apprehended better so many peop in the country reata such great importance to the country. those individuals that pose a threat of crossing the border recently they were set forth by this secretary a little more than a year ago everything we do cradle to grave emigrations and
custom enforcement you know, our focus on border security and public safety for those that have committed misdemeanors and those ever apprehended unlawfully. and to focus on those individuals after that same date so as that guy freer gaining ground so despite overall apprehension in perhaps not surprisingly those removal numbers are high but add a greater proportion of the overall removal the cheating that president's objective and in
201598% were received from the priorities 59% were criminals with an increase over 2014 proportion of the dead know the numbers are as you say but if we drill down further that figure relative to the total jobs at 91% including the transfer for those who threaten public safety with 3,000 state and law enforcement agencies
including felons of significant repeated misdemeanors or gain participants of course, this committee very well the lowe's despite our best efforts and i will assure you nobody is sitting on their laurels including the director, we are actively pursuing criminal aliens despite our best efforts are released from our custody. this is really important. that isis -- i.c.e. does not remove people we have to have a final border of removal and the travel documents to the country of
origin for the foreign national the decision that limited the ability to detain the removal of alie it is the time that they could be held the post orator custody it is six months typically that unless there is a showing of remove ability is likely whether the results of appeals this decision accounts between 30 and 40,000 convicted criminals in recent years. and this remains a key objective. mentioning one aspect for state and local custody reuse the enforcement program to expand access to the dangerous criminals.
the united states government faces daily criticism to not be flexible. is an example where we are flexible. we're not the one side is it's all something that was very important to me when i was working with 100 counties and 100 share of said we have that relationship with law-enforcement then tailor their programs to community safety needs and develop a process for that jurisdiction that we remove as many convicted criminals as recant without damaging the trust of the local communities. this is truck - - critical thereby making everyone saver i do have numbers with respect to the first six months of the jurist
diction's that have not cooperated better doing so now it is over 50 percent with at this point and then we conduct dash strategy as an encouraging sign with the deputy of lawsuits angeles to speak to local elected officials have done so. san diego, of transco, a monterey, they have so many undocumented immigrants. pep is allowing i.c.e. to reinforce these relationships you have my commitment to forge a strong and productive relationship in the future. >> after i ask my questions
senator sessions will take over and i was told i could go ahead without a ranking member but if you have the responsibility of speaking to be glad to defer to you. >> on june 29 requesting a reprogramming from your agency in enforcement from dhs that is what this question is about. less than one month later you testified before the committee how i.c.e. employees must exercise prosecutorial discretion to focus the limited resources
to insure the deportation of the removals, i'm sorry. just a minute. anyway the removals of criminal aliens for fiscal year 2015 down 22% and down 38% i the removal of criminal aliens from the interior from 2015 weirdo 27% and 53 percent over 2012. but yet you willingly gave away $100 million despite repeated complaints well you do the best you can with limited resources.
how do you justify the reprogramming and how many could have been taken off the streets with with hundred $30 million that you don't have been your budget? >> the number they stated is of the $6 billion budget we can always use resources but the is wed to the department with the border security and public safety those that are down this past year. and as a result we had
excess dollars. and i appreciate every dollar that we get with respect to our mission is not people unnecessarily but we made our decisions throughout the year and we still ended up with excess money and i trust that wisely. >> going back to that testimony it welcomes the partners then conceded there was ted decrease in the participation with you said
it wasn't because u.s. immigration and customs enforcement had that partnership but jurisdictions had withdrawn or are not coming to the table anymore. but get for the record the department revealed there are 10 jurisdictions in seven states with applications pending for years $0.12,008, seven since 2010 and to since 2012. how can you say the decrease of the 287 bridges are patient program that they have a starter not coming to the table when there are jurisdictions the applications have been pending for years? >> the secretary looked from
the first day he came on board and has been looking at every aspect of immigration enforcement efforts in this is one of them. with litigation not to be bogged down that is why we came up with pep with those jurisdictions. poillon but we are currently considering whether or not it makes sense at this point to expand 287-g and we will discuss that further. >> when do you plan to adjudicate? >> we're in the midst of it
right now. >> the senator from minnesota was your first. >> director saldana thanks for coming today. before i turn to read questions, i will draw your attention to two letters one showing by my colleagues on the question if i.c.e. is interfering with family detention centers of legal representation. many of us have argued that the administration should end the perception of the families the vast majority were fleeing conflict and violence in their own countries and their seeking
asylum here but to be necessary at i.c.e. not hinder the ability to act as counsel her gore have yet to receive a response when. will you commit to date you will take a look into this matter to provide with information? >> of course, . and i will share with you a couple of points. we have 500 congressional inquiries in a given year that is not an excuse by apologize for any delay. we are improving with the turnaround time we will keep working on that. you're familiar with the california district court decision has significantly impacted by the processing
of undocumented immigrants. will we are appealing that decision but the judge caimans one dash give us time to come to that overall. we have done so but now from the time of person is booked through the time with prospective family units the dge has imposed a 20 day requirement as long as we deal expeditiously but we are meeting got. we have turned the family detention as that decision we are appealing that because it has impacted our flexibility to enforce the law but we are complying it has turned us from detention
into processing to give them a physical and medical examination in the orderly manner and that turnaround is 20 days before averaged 60 in some more longer than that but to be issued a directive of several things a wanted done. i directed the field office directors and a radio there to assure the public that your taking a close look at family detention. the judge's order has impacted that but we're asking for more reviews what they were staying beyond those 90 days and that is not happening under -- anymore. i set up a family advocacy
group it is a list of people in the area of detention in family units and social services and enforcement with a cross-section i keep getting complemented of th caliber of the people who will help us in the advisory capacity as we move along the issues including illegal access. a much prefer to have a lawyer on the other side than pro bono representation because they can move the case for word. >> pro bono is lawyers. >> that is what i say i prefer to have a lawyer even in this case. i want to ensure legal access and we have done things already including
additional space making sure they understand the rules of the road and communication with working groups including the aclu who talk to us about what they need with legal access. we'll get you a more timely response but i wanted to make those comments. >> by time has expired. i appreciate you getting back to me on those. >> i will yielded you need to go. the. >> thanks for being here director saldana how yo
manage your professionalism homes with the united states attorney you are right i warned you that only was a difficult with the complexity but you'd be instructed by her superiors on the basis of politics of what laws to enforce and which ones not to. so i have some sympathy with a challenge windows 74 the administration's failure to enforce the law. sanctuary cities all we're asking the cruz to share information to reform that situation when the case was blocked by our friends across the aisle.
alluding to the detention policies have with regard to the unaccompanied minors of those with the single adults you're constrained by the litigation but as i discussed with secretary johnson if there is no consequence entering illegally then you are processed in release then there is no deterrence and they will not return for the court ordered removal. so as we have tried to communicate, this perception he is not dedicated is most egregiously evidence by executive action he to to undermine public confidence
with the federal government's ability willingness to enforce the immigration laws on the books. what it has done is undermined our ability to fix what we would agree is broken. i just want to ask one question about unaccompanied minors we're starting to see another uptick misunderstands those circumstances and i previously commented it is hard to imagine how bad things must be before a mother or father would put a minor child into the hands of a criminal organization to be smuggled through mexico into the united states many are insulted
insulted, robbed, killed or injured some fatally. one of the things that concerns me the most is third no comprehensive background check for the sponsors for the unaccompanied minors we found from whistle-blowers some children are put in the custody of non-citizens but people with criminal records some of which with trafficking and other crimes and subjecting these children to exploitation or worse. and i think i knew of strong conscience and very professional but doesn't that bother you the government places children into the hands of people with criminal recordsnd to have not been adequately
screened and maybe the continuing exploitation of these children that are supported by these organizations engaged in illegal smuggling and trafficking? >> of course, it bothers me. i have learned of those allegations. if you are soliciting my opinion we're not in the children placement business we turn over any children to health and human services they place the children and have those policies. i will look further into this just because i am interested as an american citizen to ask questions to see if there is anything we can do to help with these
questions are more properly directed to department of health and human services. >> you are the witness today sanders than their role but i don't think it is satisfactory to the american people to have federal officials politicians are appointed to say that's not my job so i am not responsible for or do appreciate your willingness to look at this further i hope we have more of a conversation but it demonstrates where many criminals better not removed of the policies prey on and exploit those communities that we say we try to protect and here the children are exploited perhaps by human traffickers and others that would exploit them as a result of
the policies that some view as helpful to them when it is the unspeakable situation and would forge were conversations. >> thank you for your testimony. june 27 comment 2013 on the floor of the senate we pass comprehensive immigration reform bill with 68 votes we said for months working on the details getting care for the effort to pass the bill. many were critical today voted against the bill. one of the requirements was for those who were undocumented who wanted to continue to reside and work here come forward to facing criminal background check
with that help us to root out of criminals' so they could be deported? >> as the united states attorney ira forced to follow the laws but is currently comprises the immigration act that bounces to the process. it is extraordinary even for a lawyer with my experience. i would hope despite communications we still go forward with the immigration reform because what we hear will not get us there. >> estimated that 11 million undocumented, reform require them to come forward to face
a criminal background check to continue to reside and work in this country i hear your testimony would have been a step forward but it was opposed by many that are questioning you today in also could have made an investment importer security between united states and mexico. some thought it was excessive we're spending roughly 3.$6 billion for year off but the immigration reform bill would have increased that of 46 billion. from border patrol agents from 20,000 up a 38,000 we would not have to build donald trump's wall he would achieve their vacation of the background and had a
much stronger border security but many voted against that which is difficult to understand. trilby testimony suggesting the people supported by air agency is going down the crime has gone up. >> that is true. about two-thirds of our people on the national pocket comes from apprehensions at the border point of entry they are down significantly. >> i will stop you. why? >> i would say because the defect if enforcement. >> fewer people are trying to cross? >> yes i do believe that is a rational argument is
proportionate to the number trying to you come across yes they are down so i trust our message has gotten across. >> two-thirds of those deported apprehended at or near the border to use a few are are coming across so fewer are deported? >> getting that number is down. >> i will say when my vote comes i said not unless you promise to come to illinois on any friday morning i wanted him to meet with those that were about to be deported and their families. there were some people with no question but there were families broken up because the mother was undocumented the rest of the household was american citizens were young people deported with no record whatsoever is a
waste of resources tell me your focus of i.c.e. deportation when it comes to distinguishing. >> their priorities announced last year make very clear what the president has talked about to not break up families but to be more effective the review at one dash removal of a mother and two children who paused no harm to a community or a convicted child molester is where we are focused on what we continue to do. even the removals are down the reason i believe i am pleased with those apprehensions and removal of criminals. >> to rehash the bill i
would note the association head of i.c.e. and the customs and immigration service council said this about the bill, and it is anti-public safety bill an entire law enforcement bill research lawmakers to oppose the bill. they issued that statement on the day came up for vote to city officers have pleaded with the lawmakers not to adopt the bill the work with us on the effective reforms for the american people. that is to represent senator rubio proposal makes america a less safe especially the
overstay iould say this isn't the solution we hear the talking points of a comprehensive bill but the officers were correct and as a result of the denial of the duties to enforce the law effectively they sued in federal court with the right to conduct lawful activities and also reported to have the lowest morale of any agency in the federal government. >> there lost that at the circuit i don't think it has gone much further. >> that is very unusual when officers do their supervisors that block them from doing their duties it shows how badly the situation is. with regards to the budget
he made reference to turning back $130 million that you did not spend with the f y 15 budget. how much did i.c.e. receive for transportation and removal of aliens? >> not off the top of my head it is 34,000 beds. >> it is mind standing 13 million came specifically from their for detention and removal and transportation of aliens. according to the information we obtained in 2011 your agency removed 150,000 criminal aliens from the interior. in 2012 dropped 135,000 to the new total then 110,000
in 2013 and 860,002,014 and fiscal year 2015 we believe it is only around 63,000. do you agree? >> of criminal removal that sounds right. >> that is a dramatic reduction more than half less than half as many criminal aliens then you were in 2011 to view are returning money they were given for that purpose. >> a big portion of that his detention that doesn't get us to removal every time but i am heartened and a bike my hands and every criminal
alien in the country illegally to remove them. this is what i did as a prosecutor in united states attorney. neither eiger the women and men who work for i.c.e. were but go of a criminal alien. >> did you make the decision what kind criminal offense those prioritized our was that maybe for you or above you? to make that is in the statutes. >> you use discretion there has to be more than two misdemeanors or felony but other people are here that commit major traffic offenses that are not being removed. >> with respect to the statute the group of people that can be removed are defined yes now we focus on
those in the memorandum in the statement that are mostly criminals and once again 59% of all of those were removed is criminal aliens that is a record-breaking percentage. >> it doesn't make me feel good because the numbers are dropping dramatically. you were dropping from the other removal defining reconsider to be criminal making up a piece of the pie >> i just ask you to give the american public some perspective we're talking about apprehensions being down substantially per car but like to think it is a projection of and for small hall so if the numbers are going down it reflects the
apprehension of the border. >> we have in the past hired more agents as we have seen a reduction of attempts but the difficulty is when you have other people allow to be released and then you are encouraging fact house senator? >> thank-you director saldana for a difficult work and a former prosecutor working with law enforcement eight years in that job obviously we have cases we worked with federal authorities on deportation
could you talk about the priority enforcement program with coronation of law-enforcement? >> let me make sure reenters manned and we have identified 300 plus with connection of apprehensions with undocumented immigrants and have charged us with the admission to work with the state and local jurisdictions and we would make tremendous progress
56 percent turnout coming back to the table and about 76% of all previously declined detainers. >> over what period? >> we will keep going with that even though they haven't come forward we will work toward that objective but it is essential to the mission not only all lan security of those efforts they need the help we need good sound relationships stick material is used to save victims of crime was a local lawyer state or federal the just wanted us to get the job done the worst is when they're fighting over jurisdiction.
i appreciate that this was touched on that with the comprehensive reform and the money we had in there for much more law-enforcement at the border helping to adjudicate cases where the major piece of the bill with a link the path to citizenship also making it more first straight forward for legal citizenship for those who work added jerry did want to bring their spouses but then they have to work in a town with the unemployment rate at 1% so could you go through how this would help you to do
your job? >> i have mentioned some of the obstacles we cannot have removals' we have courts that have very few judges compared to west docket with very few courts to handle it a current state of was better very difficult to work with and to navigate never mind those persons that lack the sophistication for kurtis important to have the jurisdictions working with us and by the way i think every first the percentages. >> they're very angry with me back here.
after his release, he posted a 10,000-dollar bond after his immigration hearing, which means that he was obligated to report this upon demand at that time. his most recent criminal offense. he was released from i.c.e. custody, arrested for murder that took place on january 22 of the year. and he received two injunctions against him. and on may 28 of this year in response to a letter that i along with chairman grassley wrote, there is no systematic offsets for state and local authorities to notify i.c.e. with an order of protection that is served. so if they had been aware of the civil injunction, would they
have taken any action. >> every decision that we make is based upon all the facts and circumstances, those are material facts. if we had known that it would have altered the decision, i cannot tell you whether would have are not them about with the speculation, but it something that we very much were taken into account. >> under this program is there a way to obtain this information if something has injunctions against them? enact it does not go the other way. it just goes from federal to state and local. >> so we have no way, unless there is an effort. >> i will tell you that as part of the disturbing fact they got my attention on this matter. and i asked all of our field office directors. i got them on video telephone conference and let us look at
every possibility in this case we didn't know about this injunction. i want to run down where you have a question. the offense that he was convicted of is going to be reduced to a misdemeanor. and so i have told them that any flight that you see, take time to run it down and let's get all the information that we can. we will continue to work with the local jurisdictions. >> so there's nothing preventing you when information is anyway? about your wired of us way back or would you need enabling legislation to wire that? >> to require them to report to us, we have criminal databases, but what we don't have is these orders necessarily which are family matters as opposed to criminal data.
>> in july you stated he would follow up. you asked a number of requests that have resulted in deportations. my office has not received any of these numbers that your office that you said you would give. do you have any of those numbers today? >> no, i do not, senator. that was july. i will have to pull that and that is probably going to be a search. i will get you a status on that. >> we would appreciate that. and otherwise we would like to get this. >> yes, sir. and you haven't mentioned that this reduces water apprehension. one such program is operation
streamlined. and they are pulling back on implementation to that program and how does that square with the recognition that this helps him in this regard and it is by all accounts we are pulling back for it. >> this involves a streamlined prosecution. and that is the department of justice that has control over that. i'm not sure what the departments former stances, but i don't think that the operation of years past did not distinguish on the status of the immigrant effects and circumstances related to that. so if it doesn't meet our
priorities, that would probably not be enough in our measures. with the focus being on criminal a danger to the community. if it just included in the mother or father, i think that under our current priorities i would not include it. >> thank you. >> i know that you are familiar with this case. and i hope that your staff has informed you about some of the questions that i have regarding
should have and could have been done. and i also want to know what brought her problem this feeling may reflect. >> as i said, we will cooperate and we know this and couldn't you have gone to the country and try to make some efforts locally. we did try to find family members. >> he was picked up coming from haiti. is that correct? >> that could be. i am not sure how he was apprehended. >> without needing to compare the two of them, the administration has said that information is weaned from various sources about refugees
coming into this country and i accept that representation that there are means to verify the origins of a person without necessarily some document in that person's hand. that could've been done here. >> we have to rely on the country to accept those travel documents and to put them in a form that they will accept the national back. that is the frustration is that there are a bunch of countries with which we have been trying to work to turn them around to get us travel documents. he does not have the interest or the resources to assist us in doing that. so we cannot just drop them off without the country being in a position to accept that. i'm as frustrated as you are. >> apart from what they are not
willing to do, i maintain, and i think that the inspector general's investigation will affirm that much more could have been done but if that is a problem, why have you not come to the congress. he receives a lot of aid from the country. >> i have personally been to the state department that was one of the representatives there. we are making all kinds of effort, the state department can be helpful in this and i am hopeful that we can turn around some of these countries. >> you can probably imagine some
of the. those that have relationships with us, many of those countries are not cooperating with us. but it can provide you with this. >> i would appreciate an answer as to what efforts have been made with those countries in the first instance. including how to change those practices, those that commit murder in our communities or other kinds because they have no business being here. and they give a bad name to all of the programs that you administer. and so we look forward to the
investigation report and i want to thank you for being here and answering my questions. and i commend your effort and their efforts are to improve the performance. so i want to thank you. >> thank you, sir. >> thank you, senator blumenthal we have an excellent line of questioning. i remember our former colleague proposing legislation both when he was a republican and a democrat, i believe. his proposal was that we stop admitting any government officials other than the ambassador and it is an
essential part of immigration system worldwide, the nation's work together. so it cannot be accepted that the nation refuses to take that criminals that have left their country after they have been convicted. that is a part of this. we have the ability to push back. so i with bank and i would appreciate it if you would consider the gentleman suggestiosuggestio n, legislation if it's needed, and i believe frankly do you have plenty of power to move the needle on this anyway. finally this is a long-term problem and it's costing us hundreds of millions of dollars. >> yes, sir. we have time and effort to go forward with this. and i think it's something that we need to fix and i appreciate you raising it. >> mr. chairman if i could just
add that we make these points is a longtime passionate supporter of immigration reform providing a path to earned his citizenship for the 11 million people who provide the more visas as well as illuminating the abuses in that program. cultural workers, helping to lead the effort. there was an overwhelming bipartisan majority that was never voted on in the house. but we can disagree even on this panel is to the overall immigration will warm. this kind of gap in enforcement and protection deserves immediate attention.
and i continue to be an advocate of comprehensive immigration reform. >> is it not true that this refusal to take people back also raises this question where you have to release people because you cannot hold them anymore? >> this is unacceptable, we don't have to come up with a policy to deal with this. that is my suggestion.
we have this in one fiscal year. in 2014, i.c.e. removed only with 315,000 that includes the border patrol after they are apprehended near the border. so in fiscal year 2013 the number of removals was only 235,000. of which only 63,000 as we noted before were criminal aliens, people that committed crimes like in san francisco. that is a dramatic drop from 150,000 criminals removed in 2011. and you know what your budget
adequate. i also believe that your answer to the senators question hs dropped from 71 agreements to 31 agreements and it's very troubling. we have to have better cooperation with local law enforcement and we need to see what works at the border. the american people are trying to argue over means and problems, they want to see some actions and positive results. and i yield back over to you. >> thank you, senator. ma'am, welcome. the last thing that we have, we discussed in 2013 how the obama administration had released over 104,000.
>> at that hearing you misstated that number by a factor of over two. and they had released illegal aliens with homicide elections. were hundred 26 sexual assault conviction and we had 303 mapping convictions. and 9187 dangerous drug conviction and 16,070 drunk or drunk driving conviction and 303 whitest deep convictions. how many murderers and rapists was real, administration
backs on the deportation of criminal aliens that needed to be removed. we are really everyone that we can. and this law provides for a lot of due process. >> what you are saying there consists of this. your first response is he needed a final order of deportation. would you have over 900,000 who have already received that. and that includes border patrol officers, i.c.e. agents, those that are dispirited. those that are immortalized.
the obama administration does not let them their jobs. over and over again in the state of texas, i speak two brave men and women were risking lives to keep us safe. you said that we should not impede the willingness to enforce the law. there are roughly 1 million illegal aliens that you have not reported. but that is not just that. beyond that. of the 36,000 that i.c.e. freed from custody in fiscal year 2013. in 1000 of them have gone on to commit new crimes. so these are criminal illegal aliens released from custody that committed new crimes.
>> i don't have that number handy. i can run down and get it to you. >> between fiscal year 2009 and 2015. the obama administration released 6151 criminal aliens. those that were specifically convicted of a sexual offense. why is i.c.e. releasing any illegal aliens that have been convicted of a sexual offense. >> you miss that part of my testimony earlier. before your arrival i explained clearly that about two thirds of the folks that have been released, you keep referring to the obama administration releasing them. that is really a mischaracterization and is misleading to the public. two thirds of those were under the united states imported position, which we follow the
law. and the supreme court. >> you simply follow the law. help me understand my president obama has issued executive amnesty refusing to follow the law. and which one is is it. >> i will tell you this. you also missed my testimony that there is a complex situation that does not leave us a lot of room. probably every illegal alien
could be removed and that is 12 million people over 50 million depending on look at. i do not think that anyone who thinks that we can go about rounding up people with a $6.5 billion budget, as generous as i believe that is, believe that we can go and do that under that budget, there are reasons to make wise and smart and effective immigration priorities which the secretary announced. we are going about it in a smart way and we are not sacrificing children when we can remove a criminal alien. there is a good explanation that comes under this statute in the senate that the house has left us with.
[inaudible] >> i recognize that the administration supports amnesty for those here illegally. they don't agree on that. you are charged with following the law. the law that congress has actually passed, not the policy views that contradict the law. you mentioned a minute ago that i.c.e. could deport 12 million people here illegally. why are they not doing so, why are they not enforcing the law. >> i believe that the congressional budget office has, we are talking about billions of dollars and that is quite frankly not very smart. >> it's not smart to enforce federal law that requires those to be deported.
>> you are playing games with words, i'm trying to help the american public. >> you are not helping the american public by doing this. and you said that it is not very smart and impractical to enforce the law. >> that is not what i said. >> how many aliens to the bill clinton administration and force. >> i do not know, i did not work without administration. >> in eight years they deported 12,190,905. the bill clinton administration was not very smart because they supported 12 million people imad. >> are you serious about this question? >> you decide it's not very smart to use the resources of i.c.e. to follow federal law and work criminal aliens. >> what i said is that i could
not enforce these laws including a migratory fowl act with 100,000 square miles. i had to make tough decisions. but i want them to be punished accordingly to yes, i did. >> administration could enforce the laws with a smaller budget than your budget. why is the obama administration unable or unwilling to enforce the law and do the same? 's 2 i beg to differ with you, sir, but this administration is enforcing a very smart way with respect to the resources that we have. >> if this administration is enforcing the law, what should
president obama say to this woman's parents? her father who held his daughter in his arms and heard her last words, help me, daddy. >> i don't know what the obama administration would do. and i met with jim and brad. i met with them and was impressed by them. they expressed their views and i listened, i admired their stamina to be able to articulate for me what a beautiful person she was and how they would like to see some changes, which is exactly how i open this testimony. i would like to see changes to the entire immigration system which supports the system that is broken and that is just not
effective. and yet we don't seem to be getting that from congress. >> did you apologize to the family on behalf of the president for his supporting policies that have created century cities across this country that led to the murder of their daughter enact. >> i disagree that that is a statement that and i did not express that and i did express my condolences for their loss. >> condolences are one thing. but apologizing for the direct consequences of the failures of the obama administration policies are another. i'm curious after meeting with the family, do you support keeps law, the legislation that i introduced to prevent another young woman like her from being murdered from an aggravated felon re-entering this country over and over again and being welcomed into a sanctuary city like in cisco.
>> i support the whole restructuring of this statute. i do not believe that piecemeal efforts here and there are a band-aid placed upon this massive problem that is going to do it without comprehensive immigration reform. >> i want to understand your testimony correctly. are you saying know that you do not support this law? you also misread my testimony as to why i cannot support -- i believe that's the one that increases. >> is a mandatory minute minimum for an aggravated felon disliked the murder that murdered kate. >> last time i checked it was very close to a majority of illegal aliens and i think that you are very much aware of the state of the current president and the fact that they are busting at the same.
>> i do not believe that increasing the minimum penalty is going to be the most effective thing. the most effective thing to do is to reform the entire code. >> i want to make sure that i understand the answer to your question. your answer is no, you do not support keeps laws. >> i do not support putting a band-aid on the issue, but i think that we should have -- >> you are able to answer a simple question. is your answer no? >> i heard he answered, sir. >> you want to play games, okay. i will say that an adnistration that refuses to follow the law, that releases
murderers and rapists, violent criminals, that has roughly 1 million alien subject to deportation, yes you say that you cannot enforce the law. there's a reason the american people are so frustrated with law enforcement officials that are charged with protecting them. those that refuse to do their duty that on behalf of thousands of border patrol agents who are frustrated out of their minds that will not let them enforce the laws, the american people are ready for leaders to take seriously the obligation to
protect this country. >> mr. chairman, i came at the beginning and i had my five minutes. and i just feel that we had a 30 minute question and answer that i think that in some ways was a kind of a little bit of a display. i was wondering if i could have some time to do some other questioning. absolutely. as a matter of fact, we didn't desire to ask any questions.
>> my time is up on my time is up. i yielded a because my time was up. >> i thought it was a very effective elucidation of facts,. so i recognize the senator. >> i would just ask. this was a tragedy. we have a system if we read all this testimony. there are limited resources but i'm not sure where the senator
got that. he is leaving now because he's had his time here. but it doesn't seem like that is an accurate statistic. and that is why i am saying it was a bit of a display. can we get where that statistic came from? i know that senator cruz knows where he pulled that from and is there anyone on the staff here. the point is that we are going to hear testimony about the use of resources and the challenges that you have. we are talking about when we did the sentencing, senator cruz
does the same kind of thing where he says one of these people are going to be released and murder someone and then you will have blood on your hands. it's a tactic that basically says that in this country that we have where there are 310 awful tragedies happening. choices are made with resources that we have and century cities are sanctuary cities for a reason because they believe that when people in the community feel like they can say, it makes
the community safer. and so you might ask, do you apologize to someone who is in a city and therefore criminals are running on the street and they murder somebody. there are real choices that are made here and it just seems an unfair tactic to take an event that would be incredibly tragic. and to take it so out of context. so we are going to have other witnesses, i don't want to ask you to speak to what we just saw unless you would like to. >> well, i would.
i spent 10 years in law enforcement before i arrived at this agency. everywhere that i have been, i've been to quite a few cities and we have 26 essential communities out there with different areas of responsibility to cover the entire country and i see people that appreciate being able to go after the worst of the worst and those that do not complain about what they can't do and are very pleased for what they can do. i am here to do a job. and i am very disappointed, not that it matters. we are here other than trying to
make this better, i want to work with anyone who has ideas to help us to do so. and that was not helpful and that is what i am here to do. i would invite the senator and anybody he has already spent many hours on this. if we have something constructive to suggest, i am all ears. >> let's forget all of the other actions not to enforce a law that immortalizes the officers that you lead. they sued mr. martin because he said his policies were blocking him from doing this.
this administration should have been on since the disco were found out if they committed any errors just like senator blumenthal is example. when a person comes in and serves 15 years in jail, you ought to be sure that he is deported. the law gives you the authority. you cannot just sit here and pretend that you do not control events. you're just going to have to make sure that these countries take that these people. bet your officers are on top of these cities or whether or not there was any problems with them cooperating or not. that is all i am saying to you. we see this.
we have seen that it has dropped 50% over just a few years and all others have been dropping as well. and you said that this is our priority. dropping 90,000, more than half when the budget has gone up. so some people are not happy about this and we want some productive answers. one final question. i think that this gives a look at the heart of what we are dealing with. the president has issued two executive amnesty is since 2012 and 2014 with these programs, undocumented in the country improperly, social security number. let's say that we have an open job for forklift operator in
alabama that pays $15 per hour. two applicants apply. the first is an american citizen in the second is the individual that enters illegally and receives a presidential id and work permit. who has more right to the job? the american citizen or the person entering unlawfully? >> i leave it to the employer to decide who has a big right for the job based on qualification. >> do you support that? >> i support the employer having the right to make a decision between people that are lawfully in the country to be able to be a part of this.
>> it says that people are motley here are not able to work in america. >> so the president has declared despite the lie you have the same right to work. if an employer says i want to hire a citizen, despite what the president says. does he have that right? >> we are mixing apples and oranges. you are assuming that there is no lawful status. it was already referred to as amnesty. we have a fundamental agreement and i don't know that it serves any purpose. >> you support the president's power to declare this without lawful work status even though the court has so far ruled otherwise? >> the lower court? the district court?
>> yes. >> yes. i think you understand because you are familiar with this. there is an appealing the decision. i support the president and i support that department of justice opinion. and what he did was lawful and what the secretary did was lawful. >> we did need to go through to the next panel. this is a national issue of importance to the american people. you're getting directions from above. and we expect the highest performance out of your office and your supervisors. >> quite frankly, i'm working every day long hours to do that. >> thank you very much.
[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> first we have the director of policy studies at the center for immigration studies, where she has worked since 1992. she served as a foreign service officer with the state department. ma'am, would you like to do your opening statement now? thank you for your contribution to these discussions. >> good afternoon, thank you for the opportunity to testify.
this is certainly an area that is right for congressional oversight. the obama administration is truly causing harm with its relentless efforts to undermine immigration enforcement with the result that hundreds of thousands of criminal aliens remain here in a position to harm others. today i want to summarize the official statistics on criminal alien removal and discuss the reasons for these trends and what this means for public safety in our communities. immigration enforcement is in a state of collapse. total deportations from the interior is factoring out the apprehensions have declined and now are about one third what they were just three years ago. >> that is the border patrol at the border enact.
>> yes. and the legal ports of entry also, they catch people sometimes coming in as imposters and so on. that's down from about 200,000 to about 72,000 in 2015. criminal deportations, as you noted, are supposed to be the highest priority and have been near exclusive enforcement of the obama administration that has dropped by about half since 2012 bid last year i.c.e. managed to deport 63,000 criminal aliens that of an estimated population of more than 2 million. we are talking about illegal aliens involved in this. again, something that is supposed to be a top priority. these arrests have dropped by more than half an what is the reason for this decline? congress has been responsive to the public providing a reasonable amount of funding to
remove criminal aliens. it is not because there are fewer mental aliens to arrest. the size of illegal immigrant population has not declined and seems to be increasing. they estimate of there about 2 million criminal aliens living in the country, and it's not because they are hard line. this decline has occurred at a time when they have more resources and vendors as dems to identify criminal aliens than ever before, including the universal the interoperability with the national fingerprinting system. in recent years we have encountered with record numbers with the specific goal of dismantling a fairly new system of immigration enforcement so that only the most egregious criminals and laws are subject to immigration enforcement.
>> and the latest generation is the program that has drawn so much criticism. they have detainer scum of the accelerated form of due process that avoids the need for long drawnout proceedings in immigration courts and partnerships with local law enforcement agencies. and half of the and criminal aliens are there.
>> >> this is deliver abdication of the federal government's responsibility to enforce laws that subjects the american community to a necessary from criminals who should not be here to begin with. >> thank you. >> as director of national sheriffs' association as leader of dextral a homeland affairs also previously served. >> thank you and we hope
that will be put into the statement executive director for the national service association representing more than 3,000 cherubs worldwide from the smallest of the largest county. it has become clear the administration in removal policies put share of city untenable position that may be clear about one thing they share a support and we stand ready to preserve national security.
nor will they ignore the oath of office and the policy ideas by this administration must be legal and within the context of constitutionality. which lot do with the shares to break? disagreement has come from across the political specter they have taken different traditions waiting to a patchwork of local ordinances the sheriffs are left with few options each with significant risk to public safety and serious ability questions. this is unacceptable. we have one simple request.
with the constitutional questions and to continue ignoring the question and it is imperative with their oversight to ensure this bill go opinion is issued. and introduced bayou that nsa supports with the informational and sherry between the fbi database with immigration and violators and sell powers rather requiring them to share biometric biographical and other identifying information for the federal authorities and to create clear guidelines for the
custom atriums her to the federal government. we commend you for the introduction of this bill. it does not negate that enforcement is a federal responsibility not stater local. to review criminal aliens are reported each year and day parameters are to lowe's some better subject to removal end up back into the community which is more bureaucratic excuses. of the arizona shares associated highlights criminal aliens despite convictions of crimes of aggregated results kidnapping and murder. violent crimes and criminals
be here. >> the deputy director of u.s. immigration program institute also associate professor in in the university of maryland's previously working at the congressional research service at the council foreign relations serving as the policy team. dr. richard led to hear opening statements. >> thank you for the opportunity to air testify that a full statement be included in the record. with the united states does force of measures to combat illegal immigration by tightening border security also to identify and detailed and deport recently
these investments paid off as the population and has declined by more than 1 million people since 2007. represents the number of challenges because of the grants are dispersed but with no controlled space the interior enforcement is extensive because it is labor intensive it did light of these challenges that have for decades that the target reinforcement resources are identified as high priorities for deportation. to authorize with the informal executive-branch policy they have consistently focused on the save list of priorities of national security threats, a
convicted criminals border crossers and repeat crossers. even the clearly articulated facing trade offs to design the enforcement strategy with the tension between the quantity and quality of deportations of finite resources to a 20 but that means less focus on others who are the enforcement priorities the cost for deportation illustrates this tension. the four major enforcement programs is the most targeted as its sense agents into the community to look at high prairie case is also looking at those expensive ever to go for $4,000 per arrest compared to less of 1,000 for their criminal
alien program. and also must be weighed against the trade offs many law-enforcement agencies are cooperating with i.c.e. but hundreds of other committees have limited their role because the reduces community trust with the police and takes resources away from core responsibilities. my organization estimates 53 percent of the unauthorized population lived in jurisdictions this is the main reason the administration ended the program to redesign the approach to the prairie the enforcement program. strict immigration control kampen damage done american families and communities as many are deeply integrated within the united states. 79% of unauthorized immigrants have lived here at least five years and most
children are u.s. citizens. policy makers must weigh how to best in force there mission while limiting harm investiture the civil and constitutional rights of all residents are protected. there is little debate if the chest should set enforcement priorities or which should be the highest priorities for deportation how important is it to maximize the total number of removals' purse is focusing resources on high priority cases? deportation shows even this administration and continues touche remove and record numbers the answer has changed over time. deportation increase rapidly
between 2003 and 2009 but the shrinking share of conviction and a rising share out of their priority. 47% of the cases had no criminal record at all. recently focusing on high priority cases although interior removal spell since 2013 the number of criminals increased by 10,000 by 2013 the last year we have records for serious criminals were 68 percent of removal the border removal is another top priority increased by 100,000 and as a result 99 percent of all removal fell within the categories.
i am happy to answer any questions. >> would you like to go first? >> you can go first. [laughter] >> i know you care about these issues i appreciate your attention to them. what said strikes me as very troubling for your rubbers to said there were these situations to be arrested the 225 charges but only five of those that i.c.e. would except for removal. is it true that they must deport criminal aliens?
day you feel with the federal government will take over immigration which apparently it as a legal right to reduce route to follow through and follow the law? >> absolutely. >> the answer is yes. but if someone is arrested put it into a county jail then fingerprinted they are shuffled off to the great divide the hit comes back to see that person is here and detain them. the electronic document is for you to the sheriff's office sometimes it is just the facts that says please. we are requesting the you detain this person. they have reason to believe he falls into one of these categories. as you know, that is a
clear violation of what the supreme court said we can do. a share raff cannot violate the constitution to say we will hold that person until you come and get them or send us a federal warrant. this is a terrible situation to be in. me personally it easier politically naive, ignorance or just incompetence but i do believe is it is the political calculus i really do believe that. as i listen to to the director ever shake and. every day there are dozens and dozens if not hundreds or thousands of these request that same old this person and they cannot in
good faith for coated must release them. and yet we still have more money going to i.c.e., of officers whose unions are tied and that communities are risk. >> the simple question. so what happens if the person is reckless driving as the officer approaches to find out the individual is illegally in the country? what happens? that the town hall people say turn them over to the feds for deportation security . . . unless there is multiple offenses. >> that is absolutely the
case. >> if he is doing his duty. >> that's correct. >> but to protect those local citizens they will not come get them. >> correct. >> how would you comment on this situation? have you given any thought to that? >> i have. first, the code of federal regulation is very clear and says was the local law enforcement officer receives a dictator from i.c.e. they shall maintain custody for no more than 48 hours the is -- but there is the expectation to maintain custody. congress has given i.c.e. the authority to issue the detainerand the
expectation is they should be complied with and more than 90 percent of the sheriffs and the country want to comply even the police chief in the self-described sanctuary jurisdictions have testified they comply fully with all i.c.e. detainers better issued so it isn't a question to be illegal or unconstitutional. they are an accepted lawful instrument for i.c.e. to use for those to pursue with deportation so the problem is the obama administration has introduced confusion by changing decades of the interpretation of the regulations that they have for congress now all of a
sudden said this is just a request would be for there always considered obligatory of course, a sheriff would always honor a detailed request from the u.s. marshals, where u.s. military police or the appropriation office if one of those agencies issued a request there would not think twice but just the fact is immigration enforcement that makes it controversial. the administration's policy was done without any bagel foundation over the objections over there very senior career people at that agency. to the extent there is any confusion in my opinion they have instigated that confusion with the administration with the goal to the goal action and it could have been solved with
a sanctuary bill that you wrote and introduced. that is the answer. 287-g officers have of unity that could be offered to any law enforcement officer receives the detainer from ice. >> that is something we need to solve. i.c.e. issues that before they're released that are they willing to turn the person over? >> oftentimes they do provide the detail her before they are due to be released. >> eight can solve part of problem. but the biggest problem is after that timeline over 90 percent of the time there is no i.c.e. officer to collect the individual or
customs our border patrol and the sheriff can no longer hold the individual they must be released. >> thank you. dr. of a bike tuesday on the trade-off that you mentioned the relationship with enforcement and public safety one of the main differences with the priority enforcement program as of predecessor is that pep in the mitt certain forms of cooperation between dhs and local law enforcement agencies. how does the pep program work with this? how does it enhance public safety? >> thank you. the program relies on the
exact same information sharing and to identify potentially removable non-citizens who are arrested. it tries to respond to two different problems that secure communities a majority of the people deported never committed a crime or a minor offenses that was the first career four years of the program that is was generated such a broad backlash and not just san francisco or new york there are hundreds of cities and towns around the country atlanta, a wichita kansas kansas, led the maintained that pep does you all may take custody of those to come through the criminal-justice system if they have committed a serious crime.
instead of someone who was pulled over because that is what generated the backlash. it allows communities to negotiate because many police chiefs that represent all large city police and many other organizations have argued to have those mandates to compromise the efforts of those departments that have strong relationships with their communities to do policing so they cannot report crimes or cooperate so many a jurisdictions have found there rather have more limited cooperation